Ster Kinekor (Proprietary) Limited v Daka and Another (J1213/2000) [2000] ZALC 4; [2001] 10 BLLR 1178 (LC) (5 February 2000)

Ster Kinekor (Proprietary) Limited v Daka and Another (J1213/2000) [2000] ZALC 4; [2001] 10 BLLR 1178 (LC) (5 February 2000)

The court held that the applicant failed to establish any reviewable irregularity in the arbitrator's award. The arbitrator's findings were based on facts that were largely common cause, and the reasons provided were sound. The absence of a record of the arbitration proceedings made it impossible to substantiate the alleged irregularities. The court found that the applicant's complaints amounted to an appeal on the merits rather than a proper review. There was no conclusive proof of dishonesty by the employee, and the employer was aware of the material facts. Accordingly, there was no basis to interfere with the arbitrator's decision to reinstate the employee.

Citation
[2000] ZALC 4
Parties
Applicant: Ster Kinekor (Proprietary) Limited; Respondent: Kelvin Daka; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 February 2000
Case Number
J1213/2000
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
E Revelas
Legal Topics
Review of Arbitration Award, Substantive Fairness, Misconduct, Dismissal, Duty of Disclosure
Labour Law Civil Procedure Review of Arbitration Award Substantive Fairness Misconduct Dismissal Duty of Disclosure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ster Kinekor (Proprietary) Limited

Applicant

Kelvin Daka

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration award reinstating the employee was reviewable under section 145 of the Labour Relations Act.
  2. 2 Whether the employee's conduct amounted to dishonesty or misrepresentation justifying dismissal.
  3. 3 Whether the absence of a record of the arbitration proceedings precluded review.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant failed to establish any reviewable irregularity in the arbitrator's award. The arbitrator's findings were based on facts that were largely common cause, and the reasons provided were sound. The absence of a record of the arbitration proceedings made it impossible to substantiate the alleged irregularities. The court found that the applicant's complaints amounted to an appeal on the merits rather than a proper review. There was no conclusive proof of dishonesty by the employee, and the employer was aware of the material facts. Accordingly, there was no basis to interfere with the arbitrator's decision to reinstate the employee.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application to review and set aside the arbitration award is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings.